^^^
When I bartended there were two guys in particular I remember...Jim and Shep...and they did this munchausen thing... but in the 3-D world. One of them...Jim...he made my skin crawl so bad...I intensely disliked him and challenged him all the time...he always told whoever he was talking to about a disease he had (he was fine)...and he would reel them in like a big fish. If I said anything in front of the other guy once he was hooked...I got told off and they thought I was a mean asshole for being cruel to poor Jim...and at death's doorstop no less....UGH...he often left with their wallet and keys and then they would STILL wonder what happened.
The other one...I knew he was full of shit but my hormones were raging because I wanted to have sex with him real bad...and he was a fellow bartender for a short time ....I wanted it bad...LMAO...until...I actually had my chance...and even THAT was false. He had a hairpiece that was funky and a sock in his bulge and fake tan crap that got all over my hands and face and he wore a girdle around his waist and while we were making out he started talking like a sleazy porn producer ....
...and then for the first time..my skin started to crawl...as it should have all along...my inner slut just put on a pair of rose colored glasses so I wouldn't notice....but rose colored glasses have an expiration date...and mine ran out when the sleazy porn producer started talking to me....EWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
Oh yeah [MENTION=20359]Cuddly[/MENTION]...your question about why they do it/motive...my impression...not a definitive answer..was that they were addicted to it and got off on it..they actually had an orgasmic look about them while they were in the middle of their schtick....not really sure why. Probably some bad wiring.
![[-]](https://gayspeak.com/images/duende_v3_local/collapse.png)
•
Cuddly Wrote:What's the motive though? It just seems so pointless to join an anonymous forum and then make up horrible stories.
I suppose it could satisfy a need for attention or chaos.
This is exactly the reason. If you read the Wiki article, it gives a fairly good summary of the foundations of the condition. It is a sociopathic psychological disorder and the internet has made it easier for people with this syndrome to reach an audience of hundreds or even thousands.
•
Malice is an outworking of impotence. By that, I don't mean limp dick, but social and political impotence.
When we are in constructive relationships, we are significant. If we cultivate love, and are important to another, then we wield a certain power or control. Other people are influenced by us and our well being. The same is true when we are part of a work team, either for pay or volunteer. Others depend upon us. We have an impact.
But, if we fail to develop real relationships, or find meaningful work, it is more likely to allow us to explore the power of negative impact. We can't make someone else love us, so we find it easy to have an equally significant impact by hurting others. It is not dissimilar to a bully's attitude.
In this case, the individual has learned to be pleased by being "smarter" than his victims. He seeks out forums where caring people give advice. He ingratiates himself, and then turns on the counselors once he has set the hook. It doesn't actually matter that he has succeeded in evoking love or care from his targets, as he views those as expressions of simple-minded weakness. He then progresses to extremes like faking his death, hoping to dupe men into guilt, recrimination, or more dramatic encounters. And then his game is up, and he is only left with abusive language and a flourish of lies and profanities.
Evil and folly are and always have been closely related. Fiction empowers evil with some sort of superpower-like omnipotence, but in reality, it is small and foolish and weak. Only when many people choose folly as a mass action is evil powerful.
The internet is kinda like some South Pacific isle with no predators native to the ecosystem. But, it is inevitable that some craft lands that has stowaways on board, like the Norway rat. Once they get ashore, they look about and discover, "this is EASY!" So it is with our trolls. They skulk about in the shadow of anonymity, not having to live with their fellow men in reality, thriving on the prey they find unprotected. It isn't going to be possible to wipe them out, only to club a few to death when we catch them. Sadly, they don't actually commit suicide.
Observe.
•
Posts: 2,751
Threads: 77
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
0
Mood: None
i always wondered about the reason too. but [MENTION=21495]Rareboy[/MENTION]'s offer at Münchausen makes sense to me. this might explain at least some of them. for others, it's probably the need for attention, sympathy, etc. they're much more likely to PM/chat with people who they perceive as open to believe them.
in real life they're a lot easier to spot. you have a lot more information in the form of body language and essential physical cues that your brain understands what to associate with. so you get that involuntary aversion to stay away from them, (or East's version on skin crawlies), which is simply an evolutionary development to keep you out of harm and disease. on the internet it's just plain text devoid of any emotional inflection.
•
This sounds like something my ex would do (the one I mentioned in the sociopath thread). He posted on Facebook a few months ago that he was his "friend" and was just letting everyone know that he had commited suicide. Of course about a week later I saw where he had created a new FB account.
When we were together he faked a suicide when I told him I wanted to break up. It was very dramatic, with an ambulance and a stay in the psych ward. I think he even conned those people, because they thought he was just depressed. They didn't see what I did, the guy was a nut. 
•
Guys who need attention because they think their life is insignificant. What else?
There is no point to hate them. Not paying attention is the most efficient and harmful solution. 
•
^ But that is too reductionist.
The harm done by such trolling is significant. It burns the fingers of men giving genuine aid to those who come to such a forum seeking counsel. It instills a doubt and skepticism about the authenticity of other posts.
Excusing the troll as some sick person who needs coddling is errant. There is no evidence that the troll himself thinks his life is insignificant. To the contrary, most seem to have a haughty disdain for the masses, unaware that their obsession with duping us is a product of their own impotence.
And hate isn't like pregnancy, not a 0-100% dichotomy. We may hate drunk drivers. Drunk drivers may be alcoholics formed in the forge of miserable childhoods that lacked guidance or support as they reached their majority. Or, they may simply be self-indulgent drunks who don't give a damn what harm may come from their partying. In the end, it doesn't matter, as driving under the influence is an evil thing and worthy of society's scorn. There is likewise no need to make trolls into some sort of psychological victims of themselves. Their behavior is reprehensible, and suitable for condemnation prima facie.
•
Hardheaded1 Wrote:^ But that is too reductionist.
The harm done by such trolling is significant. It burns the fingers of men giving genuine aid to those who come to such a forum seeking counsel. It instills a doubt and skepticism about the authenticity of other posts.
Excusing the troll as some sick person who needs coddling is errant. There is no evidence that the troll himself thinks his life is insignificant. To the contrary, most seem to have a haughty disdain for the masses, unaware that their obsession with duping us is a product of their own impotence.
And hate isn't like pregnancy, not a 0-100% dichotomy. We may hate drunk drivers. Drunk drivers may be alcoholics formed in the forge of miserable childhoods that lacked guidance or support as they reached their majority. Or, they may simply be self-indulgent drunks who don't give a damn what harm may come from their partying. In the end, it doesn't matter, as driving under the influence is an evil thing and worthy of society's scorn. There is likewise no need to make trolls into some sort of psychological victims of themselves. Their behavior is reprehensible, and suitable for condemnation prima facie.
I agree with this post. Once you have been burned after trying to help someone you start to wonder who you can trust. But you can't let that stop you from caring.
•
This sort of post reminds me of kids throwing eggs at a house and running away. Suuuuuper funny, am I right, guys? *wink*
Of course, kids usually grow up
•
Hardheaded1 Wrote:^ But that is too reductionist.
The harm done by such trolling is significant. It burns the fingers of men giving genuine aid to those who come to such a forum seeking counsel. It instills a doubt and skepticism about the authenticity of other posts.
Excusing the troll as some sick person who needs coddling is errant. There is no evidence that the troll himself thinks his life is insignificant. To the contrary, most seem to have a haughty disdain for the masses, unaware that their obsession with duping us is a product of their own impotence.
And hate isn't like pregnancy, not a 0-100% dichotomy. We may hate drunk drivers. Drunk drivers may be alcoholics formed in the forge of miserable childhoods that lacked guidance or support as they reached their majority. Or, they may simply be self-indulgent drunks who don't give a damn what harm may come from their partying. In the end, it doesn't matter, as driving under the influence is an evil thing and worthy of society's scorn. There is likewise no need to make trolls into some sort of psychological victims of themselves. Their behavior is reprehensible, and suitable for condemnation prima facie. The problem is that those trolls are exactly looking for people reacting just as you do. 
The expression "don't feed the troll" is very accurate!
The best way to fight them is neither to answer, nor to give a single fuckâ¦just answer a "don't feed the troll", warn people that what he's saying has absolutely no credibility.
•
|
